ArticleScientific reports2024
Optimization of antimicrobial nanocomposite films based on carboxymethyl cellulose incorporating chitosan nanofibers and Guggul gum polysaccharide.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Active Eco-friendly Mucilage-Based Films Reinforced with Graphitic Carbon Nitride (g‑CACS omega · 2026Article
- Article
- Carboxymethyl Cellulose-Based Films for Sustainable Food Packaging: Modification Strategies and Structure-Property Relationships.Polymers · 2026Review
- Preliminary Investigation on Mandarin Peel Extraction and Development of Functionalized Chitosan-Guar Gum Edible Films Using Response Surface Methodology (RSM).Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development and characterization of active chitosan/olibanum packaging films with lavender nanoemulsion and TiO₂ for silver carp preservation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Antibacterial and Biocompatible Penicillin-Streptomycin Loaded Bacterial Cellulose (BC) Hydrogels for Wound Healing.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study utilized response surface methodology (RSM) to investigate the impact of varying concentrations of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC: 0.75-1.75 wt%), Commiphora mukul polysaccharide (CMP: 0-1 wt%), and Chitosan Nanofiber (CHNF: 0-1 wt%) on the physical and antimicrobial characteristics of nanocomposite films based on CMC. The optimization process aimed to enhance ultimate tensile strength (UTS), strain at break (SAB), and antibacterial activity, while minimizing water vapor permeability (WVP), solubility, swelling, moisture content, opacity, and total color difference (ΔE). The results revealed that both CMP and CHNF had a positive influence on reducing moisture content, WVP, and increasing UTS. However, higher concentrations of CMP and CHNF had a divergent effect on SAB, ΔE, and swelling. The incorporation of CMP led to increased opacity and solubility, while the inclusion of CHNF resulted in decreased opacity and solubility. Notably, only CHNF addition significantly improved the antibacterial properties of the films. By applying the optimization procedure utilizing RSM, the formulation containing CMC (1.5 wt%), CMP (0.25 wt%), and CHNF (0.75 wt%) demonstrated superior physical, mechanical, and antibacterial properties in the biodegradable film matrix. These findings highlight the potential of utilizing these components to enhance the performance of CMC-based nanocomposite films.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.